So there's yet another copyright infringement claim in the headlines, this time by two writers called Martin Harrington & Tom Leonard, who are claiming that their song 'Amazing' (recorded by X Factor winner Matt Cardle) was copied by Ed Sheeran's 'Photograph'.

 

 

More details here.

 

I'd be interested to get people's views on this. Do the songs bear more than a striking resemblance to each other? Is it just a co-incidence that both choruses sound almost identical? Should the writers of 'Amazing' get a share of the royalties from 'Photograph', even if it's just a co-incidence?

 

No (it's only the choruses that sound very similar)

Yes (can't be sure but I imagine he was at least subconsciously influenced by the Cardle song)

Yes (though 20 mill is a bit excessive , they should just settle for them to get some royalties)

sure he'll settle cos it's identical

Geez. The only thing similar was the chorus. Both songs are different. Chord progressions also cannot be copyrighted. Oh, and why did it take like almost 2 years before they sue Ed...?

The more success photograph gained the bigger the pay out. That is why i would think they waited 2 years. Both great songs, but Matt's amazing deserves far greater success as does most of his material.

The chorus is the body of the song, though. It's no defence to say "he only stole the chorus so it's not that bad".

It's not as if they were going to steal the whole song is it?

I agree about the melodies being almost the same and the overall feel but that's kinda it (they're not out of their minds about it). Thinking about it, I wonder if Ed Sheeran knew 'Amazing' and the "stealing" was accidental? Oh, well, I won't be surprised if they won the lawsuit...

 

It's always debatable how much was taken from another song. Copyright/ownership is general should be kinda simple but it's incredibly tricky at the same time...

The songwriters clearly need a boost to their income after they gave their song to Matt Cardle and it earned them £1.67 in royalties